Toxic chemical regulation overwhelmingly supported in House vote - VTDigger
 

Toxic chemical regulation overwhelmingly supported in House vote

In one of the most decisive votes of the session the Vermont House supported the regulation of toxic chemicals found in children’s products. The vote was 114-27.

The bill, S.239, gives the Vermont Department of Health the authority to require manufacturers to label or remove toxic chemicals from products sold in the state.

In its 28th annual Trouble in Toyland report, the Vermont Public Interest Research Group identifies dozens of potentially hazardous toys from national chains, dollar stores and malls around the state. Photo by Hilary Niles/VTDigger.

In its 28th annual Trouble in Toyland report in November 2013, the Vermont Public Interest Research Group identifies dozens of potentially hazardous toys from national chains, dollar stores and malls around the state. (Not all the toys shown pose chemical hazards; some pose physical hazards, such as choking.) Photo by Hilary Niles/VTDigger.

“One of the problems that we face with this whole situation is the immense growth of new chemicals coming into the marketplace without testing,” said Rep. David Deen, D-Putney, the chair of the Fish, Wildlife and Water Resources Committee who worked to draft the House version of the bill.

“This bill is to protect children’s health,” Deen told House lawmakers.

Public health advocates say the bill protects consumers of all ages from harmful chemicals linked to cancer, intellectual development disorders, asthma and reproductive health issues.

“This is really an incredible win for children and families in Vermont,” Paul Burns, executive director of the Vermont Public Interest Research Group, said in a statement. “Under this law, kids in Vermont will soon be better protected from the dangerous toxins used in everything from teething rings to teddy bears.”

If the bill is enacted into law, companies would be required to report chemicals in their products to a state website starting July 1, 2015.

Lawmakers opposing the bill were concerned about the cost to businesses for testing for chemicals that may not cause harm, echoing the concerns of manufacturers.

Bill Driscoll, vice president of Associated Industries of Vermont. Photo by John Herrick/VTDigger

Bill Driscoll, vice president of Associated Industries of Vermont. Photo by John Herrick/VTDigger

Bill Driscoll, vice president of Associated Industries of Vermont, said companies will have to test for chemicals even if there is no health risk.

“It is a bill about regulating products that contain a chemical that has some health effect linked to it, but has nothing to do with whether it’s in our products in any sort of dangerous way,” he said.

The health department, which supports the bill, said it will use a rigorous scientific method to test whether chemicals in products are at levels considered to cause harm to humans.

The bill defines children’s products as any product used by (or marketed for) children under age 12, including toys, cosmetics, jewelry, products for teething and sucking, and car seats. Electronics, winter equipment and secondhand products are exempt.

Public health advocates and some lawmakers want to see this definition expanded because children use many products, not just those made for them.

Rep. Chris Pearson. VTD/Josh Larkin

Rep. Chris Pearson. File photo by Josh Larkin/VTDigger

“It does concern me to see us limiting it this way,” said Rep. Chris Pearson, P-Burlington. “I’m going to still be quite blind as to many items that are going to be in my household.”

California, Washington state and Maine have enacted similar regulations. After pushback from manufacturers, Deen let the industry draft a bill that “harmonized” with Washington state’s program.

But Vermont’s bill still faced stiff opposition from manufacturers who view it as the groundwork for implementing new regulations on manufacturers of all consumer products.

The state regulates the use of certain chemicals, including flame retardants, Bisphenol A (BPA), mercury and lead. This bill allows the health department to expand the list every other year without legislative approval.

Manufacturers had wanted lawmakers to have the final say in which chemicals are regulated, but Fish, Wildlife and Water Resources rejected that proposal.

“We can no longer face this onslaught, chemical by chemical,” Deen said.

The bill allows the health department to report back to lawmakers next year if it recommends an expansion of regulations to other products.

Under the bill, manufacturers would be required to report toxic chemicals found in their products sold in the state and pay a $200 fee every two years for each of the chemicals they report. The fees would support the program.

Rep. David Sharpe, D-Bristol, is a member of the House Ways and Means Committee, which amended the reporting fee. He said the fee is an “assurance” that the health department will have enough money to get the program running before reporting back to lawmakers with a budget.

The health department said it has enough money to begin developing the website and listing chemicals that manufacturers already report in other states, but it will need more money to regulate chemicals going forward.

Congress is considering a bill that would ban state legislatures from passing laws regulating toxic chemicals found in consumer products. Vermont Attorney General Bill Sorrell this month sent a letter to the U.S. House of Representatives opposing the legislation.

The federal Toxic Substances Control Act has not been changed since the 1970s.

John Herrick

Leave a Reply

3 Comments on "Toxic chemical regulation overwhelmingly supported in House vote"

1000

Comment Policy

VTDigger.org requires that all commenters identify themselves by their authentic first and last names. Initials, pseudonyms or screen names are not permissible.

No personal harassment, abuse, or hate speech is permitted. Be succinct and to the point. If your comment is over 500 words, consider sending a commentary instead.

We personally review and moderate every comment that is posted here. This takes a lot of time; please consider donating to keep the conversation productive and informative.

The purpose of this policy is to encourage a civil discourse among readers who are willing to stand behind their identities and their comments. VTDigger has created a safe zone for readers who wish to engage in a thoughtful discussion on a range of subjects. We hope you join the conversation.

Privacy policy
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Chet Greenwood
2 years 7 months ago
No one should be exposed to toxic chemicals but the question is who should be doing the testing – or how many agencies do we need to test? Does this mean we will ban light bulbs that contain mercury? From “teething rings to teddy bears”- how many teddy bears will NOT be sold in VT because the manufacturer refuses to pay $100/yr per chemical to ship to the small Vermont market. NH just loves the Vermont Legislature! Will the Health Dept open up my UPS/FEDEX packages and check my puppies teething ring and make me certify is isn’t for my… Read more »
James Ehlers
2 years 7 months ago

Noble cause, indeed, but I am left wondering why the State is not addressing the host of contaminants in our drinking water and recreational waters. Is that because we have to hold ourselves accountable and there would be no manufacturer demonize? The Burton exemption is equally interesting, but hardly surprising. Do we only care about the children when one of our political friends is not inconvenienced? We can do better.

TATIANA BUILES
2 years 7 months ago

why are companies being allowed to sale children’s products made with highly toxic chemicals? if the government has the power to make certain regulations why don’t they just prohibit the manufacturing of toxic childrens products to begin with? that seems to be the most responsible solution

wpDiscuz
Thanks for reporting an error with the story, "Toxic chemical regulation overwhelmingly supported in House vote"